Yahoo messenger sign in problem

An HP 3.3 Meg Athalon processor with 512 meg memory, new two months ago and
running XP Home. A week 1/2 ago could not sign in to Yahoo Messenger.
Returns an error "Could not sign in to messenger" and asks "Retry",
Configure or Help.

Yahoo contacted and they requested a log. It was provided to them and they
turned it over to their "engineering" and havn't gotten back to us.

Failed on Sunday. I restored to the Saturday it last worked ok. No help. I
uninstalled Yahoo and all components, pieces and files. I then removed all
references to yahoo or ypager in the registery. Then I downloaded the
latest Yahoo messenger and installed from scratch. Same result. Click on
"sign in" and the face just winks one eye and stops. Can log in to Yahoo
mail and account at the Yahoo site no problem so name and password is good.

Tried signing in as a different user and account, same results. Tried
installing Yahoo Messenger on my own machine with XP Pro and it installed
fine and works great if you like Yahoo. Can't duplicate problem. Worked
fine for the first month and a half.

Advertisements

"jc" <> wrote in message
news:...
> An HP 3.3 Meg Athalon processor with 512 meg memory, new two months ago
and
> running XP Home. A week 1/2 ago could not sign in to Yahoo Messenger.
> Returns an error "Could not sign in to messenger" and asks "Retry",
> Configure or Help.
>
> Yahoo contacted and they requested a log. It was provided to them and
they
> turned it over to their "engineering" and havn't gotten back to us.
>
> Failed on Sunday. I restored to the Saturday it last worked ok. No help.
I
> uninstalled Yahoo and all components, pieces and files. I then removed
all
> references to yahoo or ypager in the registery. Then I downloaded the
> latest Yahoo messenger and installed from scratch. Same result. Click on
> "sign in" and the face just winks one eye and stops. Can log in to Yahoo
> mail and account at the Yahoo site no problem so name and password is
good.
>
> Tried signing in as a different user and account, same results. Tried
> installing Yahoo Messenger on my own machine with XP Pro and it installed
> fine and works great if you like Yahoo. Can't duplicate problem. Worked
> fine for the first month and a half.
>
> Any ideas appreciated.
>
> jc
>
>

Are you running a software firewall like Norton Internet Security or
ZoneAlarm? Disable those and try connecting again. Is the computer behind a
router? Try bypassing the router.

Advertisements

jc wrote:
> An HP 3.3 Meg Athalon processor with 512 meg memory, new two months
> ago and running XP Home. A week 1/2 ago could not sign in to Yahoo
> Messenger. Returns an error "Could not sign in to messenger" and asks
> "Retry", Configure or Help.
>
> Yahoo contacted and they requested a log. It was provided to them
> and they turned it over to their "engineering" and havn't gotten back
> to us.
>
> Failed on Sunday. I restored to the Saturday it last worked ok. No
> help. I uninstalled Yahoo and all components, pieces and files. I
> then removed all references to yahoo or ypager in the registery.
> Then I downloaded the latest Yahoo messenger and installed from
> scratch. Same result. Click on "sign in" and the face just winks
> one eye and stops. Can log in to Yahoo mail and account at the Yahoo
> site no problem so name and password is good.
>
> Tried signing in as a different user and account, same results. Tried
> installing Yahoo Messenger on my own machine with XP Pro and it
> installed fine and works great if you like Yahoo. Can't duplicate
> problem. Worked fine for the first month and a half.
>
> Any ideas appreciated.
>
> jc

1) Learn the difference between MHz and GHz.
2) You do *NOT* have a 3.3MHz processor - nor do you have a 3.3GHz
processor (unless you've seriously overclocked - and, as it's an HP and the
BIOS is locked to all but the most basic of functions, I seriously doubt
that). AMD have yet to produce a CPU with a 3.3GHz clock speed. You have a
3300+ CPU which has a clock speed of 2.3GHz.
3) It's spelt 'Athlon'.
--
Facon - the artificial bacon bits you get in Pizza Hut for sprinkling
on salads.

>
> 1) Learn the difference between MHz and GHz.
> 2) You do *NOT* have a 3.3MHz processor - nor do you have a 3.3GHz
> processor (unless you've seriously overclocked - and, as it's an HP and
the
> BIOS is locked to all but the most basic of functions, I seriously doubt
> that). AMD have yet to produce a CPU with a 3.3GHz clock speed. You have a
> 3300+ CPU which has a clock speed of 2.3GHz.
> 3) It's spelt 'Athlon'.
> --
> Facon - the artificial bacon bits you get in Pizza Hut for sprinkling
> on salads.

I'm sure you're right about the processor speed being 2.3 and yes I did use
the wrong terminology Mhz. I just posted this looking for someone who could
correct spelling without offering any usefull information whatsoever!

Thank you Archie77 for your suggestions. The HP is running Norton Antivirus
which I have disabled with no results. It is dial up and no router. I've
also disabled the XP firewall.

I really appreciate all sincere efforts to help!

Thanks again.

"Archie77" <> wrote in message
news:jbwOd.344308$Xk.81321@pd7tw3no...
>
> "jc" <> wrote in message
> news:...
> > An HP 3.3 Meg Athalon processor with 512 meg memory, new two months ago
> and
> > running XP Home. A week 1/2 ago could not sign in to Yahoo Messenger.
> > Returns an error "Could not sign in to messenger" and asks "Retry",
> > Configure or Help.
> >
> > Yahoo contacted and they requested a log. It was provided to them and
> they
> > turned it over to their "engineering" and havn't gotten back to us.
> >
> > Failed on Sunday. I restored to the Saturday it last worked ok. No
help.
> I
> > uninstalled Yahoo and all components, pieces and files. I then removed
> all
> > references to yahoo or ypager in the registery. Then I downloaded the
> > latest Yahoo messenger and installed from scratch. Same result. Click
on
> > "sign in" and the face just winks one eye and stops. Can log in to
Yahoo
> > mail and account at the Yahoo site no problem so name and password is
> good.
> >
> > Tried signing in as a different user and account, same results. Tried
> > installing Yahoo Messenger on my own machine with XP Pro and it
installed
> > fine and works great if you like Yahoo. Can't duplicate problem.
Worked
> > fine for the first month and a half.
> >
> > Any ideas appreciated.
> >
> > jc
> >
> >
>
> Are you running a software firewall like Norton Internet Security or
> ZoneAlarm? Disable those and try connecting again. Is the computer behind
a
> router? Try bypassing the router.
>
>

Blinky:
Sorry to hear that you too have no clue and are incapable of adding anything
intelligent to the subject discussed but did want to give you the
opportunity to display your uncanny and impeccable skills of hubris and
ostentation. Any time you feel the need I'm glad to help!

jc wrote:
> Blinky:
> Sorry to hear that you too have no clue and are incapable of adding anything
> intelligent to the subject discussed but did want to give you the
> opportunity to display your uncanny and impeccable skills of hubris and
> ostentation. Any time you feel the need I'm glad to help!

You misspelled "thanks for educating me as to the name of what I'm
talking about". And you're welcome. And the clueless top post, like
you did. And you're welcome again. Now off to Yahoo groups with the
rest of the newbs, with you.
> Thanks so very much.
> "Blinky the Shark" <> wrote in message
> news:...
>> jc wrote:
>> > An HP 3.3 Meg Athalon processor with 512 meg memory, new two months ago
> and
>> Athlon. Did you used to have a Penatium?
>> --
>> Blinky Linux Registered User 297263
>> Who has implemented Usenet Solution #45933:
>> Now killing all posts made with User-Agent G2 (Google Groups)

--
Blinky Linux Registered User 297263

Who has implemented Usenet Solution #45933:
Now killing all posts made with User-Agent G2 (Google Groups)

Sorry to be so dumb but who or what is a "clueless top post?" Does it have
something to do with your not knowing as much as you thought you did? Or
would that be a "clueless bottom post?" And thanks for the tip but I've
already been to Yahoo groups and although they didn't have an answer either,
they did have the decency to contain their urge to send insults, slights and
ridicule to make themselves feel big.

I'm certainly not complaining about this group as one of three respondents
did make a highly appreciated and sincere attempt to help and one of three
having some knowledge isn't a bad average!

You take care and have a great day.

"Blinky the Shark" <> wrote in message
news:...
> jc wrote:
>
> > Blinky:
>
> > Sorry to hear that you too have no clue and are incapable of adding
anything
> > intelligent to the subject discussed but did want to give you the
> > opportunity to display your uncanny and impeccable skills of hubris and
> > ostentation. Any time you feel the need I'm glad to help!
>
> You misspelled "thanks for educating me as to the name of what I'm
> talking about". And you're welcome. And the clueless top post, like
> you did. And you're welcome again. Now off to Yahoo groups with the
> rest of the newbs, with you.
>
> > Thanks so very much.
>
> > "Blinky the Shark" <> wrote in message
> > news:...
> >> jc wrote:
>
> >> > An HP 3.3 Meg Athalon processor with 512 meg memory, new two months
ago
> > and
>
> >> Athlon. Did you used to have a Penatium?
>
> >> --
> >> Blinky Linux Registered User 297263
>
> >> Who has implemented Usenet Solution #45933:
> >> Now killing all posts made with User-Agent G2 (Google Groups)
>
> --
> Blinky Linux Registered User 297263
>
> Who has implemented Usenet Solution #45933:
> Now killing all posts made with User-Agent G2 (Google Groups)

jc wrote:
> Blinky:
> Sorry to be so dumb but who or what is a "clueless top post?" Does it have

I'll type this really slowly for you. I t ' s r e p l y i n g a t
t h e t o p . Do you read the newspaper upside down, too?
> something to do with your not knowing as much as you thought you did? Or

No, it's surely not that, Sparky.
> would that be a "clueless bottom post?" And thanks for the tip but I've

I use clued inter-posting. I don't read the newspaper upside down,
either.
> already been to Yahoo groups and although they didn't have an answer either,
> they did have the decency to contain their urge to send insults, slights and
> ridicule to make themselves feel big.

They didn't know enough to try and educate you as to how to better use
Usenet. (This is Usenet; I suspect you don't know where you are.)
> I'm certainly not complaining about this group as one of three respondents
> did make a highly appreciated and sincere attempt to help and one of three
> having some knowledge isn't a bad average!

I tried to help, too. Not my fault you're unteachable.
> You take care and have a great day.

Oh, I will.
> "Blinky the Shark" <> wrote in message
> news:...
>> jc wrote:
>> > Blinky:
>> > Sorry to hear that you too have no clue and are incapable of adding
> anything
>> > intelligent to the subject discussed but did want to give you the
>> > opportunity to display your uncanny and impeccable skills of hubris and
>> > ostentation. Any time you feel the need I'm glad to help!
>> You misspelled "thanks for educating me as to the name of what I'm
>> talking about". And you're welcome. And the clueless top post, like
>> you did. And you're welcome again. Now off to Yahoo groups with the
>> rest of the newbs, with you.
>> > Thanks so very much.
>> > "Blinky the Shark" <> wrote in message
>> > news:...
>> >> jc wrote:
>> >> > An HP 3.3 Meg Athalon processor with 512 meg memory, new two months
> ago
>> > and
>> >> Athlon. Did you used to have a Penatium?
>> >> --
>> >> Blinky Linux Registered User 297263
>> >> Who has implemented Usenet Solution #45933:
>> >> Now killing all posts made with User-Agent G2 (Google Groups)
>> --
>> Blinky Linux Registered User 297263
>> Who has implemented Usenet Solution #45933:
>> Now killing all posts made with User-Agent G2 (Google Groups)

--
Blinky Linux Registered User 297263

Who has implemented Usenet Solution #45933:
Now killing all posts made with User-Agent G2 (Google Groups)

The attitude that bottom posting is the right way to post bothers me. And
not that anyone will really care, but I'm going to tell you why, anyhow.
I don't read the first chapter of a book and then reread the first chapter
to get to the second chapter, then reread the first two chapters to continue
on to the third... bottom posting is very much like that to me, senseless...
Posting inline is probably the most logical, but some folks don't make the
new entries easily distinguishable from the previous text.
Top posting gives the reader the new information without having to go
through everything else that was written previously. Providing the older
post entries after, and out of the way, for reference if they are needed.
Just my opinion... just my logic...
PJ

Blinky the Shark wrote:
> jc wrote:
>
>> Blinky:
>
>> Sorry to be so dumb but who or what is a "clueless top post?" Does
>> it have
>
> I'll type this really slowly for you. I t ' s r e p l y i n g a t
> t h e t o p . Do you read the newspaper upside down, too?
<snipped>

>> 1) Learn the difference between MHz and GHz.
>> 2) You do *NOT* have a 3.3MHz processor - nor do you have a 3.3GHz
>> processor (unless you've seriously overclocked - and, as it's an HP and
> the
>> BIOS is locked to all but the most basic of functions, I seriously doubt
>> that). AMD have yet to produce a CPU with a 3.3GHz clock speed. You have a
>> 3300+ CPU which has a clock speed of 2.3GHz.
>> 3) It's spelt 'Athlon'.
>> --
>> Facon - the artificial bacon bits you get in Pizza Hut for sprinkling
>> on salads.
> I'm sure you're right about the processor speed being 2.3 and yes I did use
> the wrong terminology Mhz. I just posted this looking for someone who could
> correct spelling without offering any usefull information whatsoever!
> Thank you very much!

The Black Laced One wrote:
> The attitude that bottom posting is the right way to post bothers
> me. And not that anyone will really care, but I'm going to tell you
> why, anyhow. I don't read the first chapter of a book and then
> reread the first chapter to get to the second chapter, then reread
> the first two chapters to continue on to the third... bottom posting
> is very much like that to me, senseless... Posting inline is
> probably the most logical, but some folks don't make the new entries
> easily distinguishable from the previous text. Top posting gives the
> reader the new information without having to go through everything
> else that was written previously. Providing the older post entries
> after, and out of the way, for reference if they are needed. Just my
> opinion... just my logic... PJ

What completely illogical logic! A book is a crap analogy. Bottom-posting is
the only logical way. These groups are Q&A, right? Well think of a Q&A
column in a computer magazine - the answer doesn't get printed before the
question, does it?

The only people who advocate top posting are those too lazy - and/or
fuckwitted - to snip. If you snip the extraneous and leave only the
relevant, you'll soon see why top-posting is nonsensical.

--
Facon - the artificial bacon bits you get in Pizza Hut for sprinkling
on salads.

The Black Laced One wrote:
> The attitude that bottom posting is the right way to post bothers me. And

I interpost. I sometimes speak out against top posting. Like I did
here, with Numbnuts.
> not that anyone will really care, but I'm going to tell you why, anyhow.
> I don't read the first chapter of a book and then reread the first chapter
> to get to the second chapter, then reread the first two chapters to continue
> on to the third... bottom posting is very much like that to me, senseless...

When it's time to read Ch.6, you turn past Chs.1-5 and find it in its
proper logical place -- you don't rip out Ch.6 and place it before
Ch.1. That would be the equivalent of top posting.
> Posting inline is probably the most logical, but some folks don't make the
> new entries easily distinguishable from the previous text.

Yes, it is the most logical. Yes, some idiots don't know how to post,
and that makes things suboptimal for others.
> Top posting gives the reader the new information without having to go
> through everything else that was written previously. Providing the older

Most keyboards are well equipped with PgDn and DnArrow keys. For
rodentophiles, many news clients have scrollbars.
> post entries after, and out of the way, for reference if they are needed.
> Just my opinion... just my logic...

No prob.

--
Blinky Linux Registered User 297263

Who has implemented Usenet Solution #45933:
Now killing all posts made with User-Agent G2 (Google Groups)

Miss Perspicacia Tick wrote:
> Blinky the Shark wrote:
>> jc wrote:
>>> An HP 3.3 Meg Athalon processor with 512 meg memory, new two months
>>> ago and
>> Athlon. Did you used to have a Penatium?
> No, it was a Penitium. ;o)

And before that some 3886s and 4886s.

--
Blinky Linux Registered User 297263

Who has implemented Usenet Solution #45933:
Now killing all posts made with User-Agent G2 (Google Groups)

>> 1) Learn the difference between MHz and GHz.
>> 2) You do *NOT* have a 3.3MHz processor - nor do you have a 3.3GHz
>> processor (unless you've seriously overclocked - and, as it's an HP and
> the
>> BIOS is locked to all but the most basic of functions, I seriously doubt
>> that). AMD have yet to produce a CPU with a 3.3GHz clock speed. You have a
>> 3300+ CPU which has a clock speed of 2.3GHz.
>> 3) It's spelt 'Athlon'.
>> --
>> Facon - the artificial bacon bits you get in Pizza Hut for sprinkling
>> on salads.
> I'm sure you're right about the processor speed being 2.3 and yes I did use
> the wrong terminology Mhz. I just posted this looking for someone who could
> correct spelling without offering any usefull information whatsoever!

I would think trying to educate you enough to at least know what your
own equipment is would be considered useful.

--
Blinky Linux Registered User 297263

Who has implemented Usenet Solution #45933:
Now killing all posts made with User-Agent G2 (Google Groups)

Miss Perspicacia Tick wrote:
> The Black Laced One wrote:
>> The attitude that bottom posting is the right way to post bothers
>> me. And not that anyone will really care, but I'm going to tell you
>> why, anyhow. I don't read the first chapter of a book and then
>> reread the first chapter to get to the second chapter, then reread
>> the first two chapters to continue on to the third... bottom posting
>> is very much like that to me, senseless... Posting inline is
>> probably the most logical, but some folks don't make the new entries
>> easily distinguishable from the previous text. Top posting gives the
>> reader the new information without having to go through everything
>> else that was written previously. Providing the older post entries
>> after, and out of the way, for reference if they are needed. Just my
>> opinion... just my logic... PJ
>
>
> What completely illogical logic! A book is a crap analogy.
> Bottom-posting is the only logical way. These groups are Q&A, right?
> Well think of a Q&A column in a computer magazine - the answer
> doesn't get printed before the question, does it?

Your analogy is no better. Usenet is many people communicating at the
same time through written word... the threads are conversations. Usenet is
rarely: Here is the question and here is the answer. Frankly, it would be
boring if it were like that.
>
> The only people who advocate top posting are those too lazy - and/or
> fuckwitted - to snip. If you snip the extraneous and leave only the
> relevant, you'll soon see why top-posting is nonsensical.

Your need to personally attack someone who doesn't see things your way, is
pathetic. It shows me that you don't have enough confidence in your
reasoning alone, to debate an issue. If you don't trust its worthiness, why
should I?
To limit yourself to only one way of posting in usenet is purely foolish.
Even if I do prefer top posting, it certainly isn't the right way, every
time. Same as with bottom posting...
PJ

Share This Page

Welcome to Velocity Reviews!

Welcome to the Velocity Reviews, the place to come for the latest tech news and reviews.

Please join our friendly community by clicking the button below - it only takes a few seconds and is totally free. You'll be able to chat with other enthusiasts and get tech help from other members.
Sign up now!